Supreme Court Upholds Ban On Supporting Terrorist Groups

Yesterday the Supreme Court upheld a law, adopted in 1996, that bans Americans from providing support to foreign terrorist groups. Up to fifteen years in prison is the penalty for contributing cash, weapons, training, personnel, and expert advice or assistance to any foreign group that the United States deems as terrorists.

David Cole, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, who also volunteered his services as counsel for the Humanitarian Law Project on this case, said, "in the name of fighting terrorism, the court has said that the First Amendment permits Congress to make it a crime to work for peace and human rights. That is wrong."

Writing for the 6-3 majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., said, "at bottom, plaintiffs simply disagree with the considered judgment of congress and the executive that providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization — even seemingly benign support — bolsters the terrorist activities of that organisation."

Guests:

Produced by:

Tags:

Comments [3]

Diane
from THE CITY OF NEW YORK

YES! APPEALS COURT IS THE HIGHESTCOURT IN THE COUNTRY, AND WHENEVER AN CHOSEN INDIVIDUAL HAS PROVEN, THE BUREN OF PROVE IN DOCUMENTS OF ANY FELONIES IN IDENTITY THIEVES, USE AN CITIZENS I.DTOO, RECEIVE THE NECESSARIES OF FAMILIES HOUSING, EMPLOYMENT, JAIL TIME,ANY DOORS THAT OPEN FOR THEM IS CRIMES AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL TO DO SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH. THIS ARE CRIMES FOR THE JUDGE TO CORRECT, FOR GOD'S SAKE. KINGS SUPREME COURT IS ALSO THE HIGHEST COUR OF LAW!THE CITY ORDINARILY, OBEY ODEDIENCE TO LAW & RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY KINGS SUPREME COURT. BE OPTIMISM, PLEASE STOP THE ORDEALS ON INOCENTS OF PERSONS, OUR GRANDCHILDREN AND OUR STATE. ADMINSTER IN GOOD FAITH A POLICY DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT THE FACILITY IS FREE OF ILLEGAL USE POSSESSION, OR DISTRIBUTION OF DRUGE AND ALCOHOL BY ITS BENEFICIARIES.MEET THE ESTABLISHED DEADLINES FOR OBLIGATING FUNDS AWARDED;

This is another case where our basic freedoms have been compromised by hysterical reactions to terrorist acts and the threat of additional acts. The Supreme Court has said it is alright to criminalize the exercise of First Amendment rights. Surely al quaeda is exchanging high fives in a cave somewhere on the Afghan-Pakistan border. If we have to compromise our Constitutional rights to defeat the terrorists, what indeed are we fighting for?

It's extremely important to try to understand the Turkish/PKK conflict in a historical perspective. It's a gross oversimplification to state without giving any background information, as John did, that the PKK is a terrorist organization or at least the Turkish government considers it so. While I would not condone PKK tactics, the Turkish forces are equally culpable for human rights abuses.The PKK are militant separatists waging an insurgency on behalf of the largest ethnic group in the world without a nation. Of the four nations that Kurdistan comprises (Syria, Iran, Iraq and Turkey), the Kurds have received the worst treatment in Turkey. The situation is complex, and simply repeating the rhetoric of the Turkish government does a disservice to all sides.